i am curious about the 122 mile long towner railroad which operates 122 miles of ex MP track from NA junction near pueblo, colorado to Towner colorado on colorado/kansas border. is this shortline still in business, or is it being torn up for scrap. heard that V&S Railway owned it and then heard state of colorado owned the railroad. can anyone help me sort out which is correct info?
You may already know this, but V&S railway filed for abandoment of the line in August of this year 2015)
V and S Railway, LLC—AbandonmentExemption—in Pueblo, Crowley, andKiowa Counties, Colo.V and S Railway, LLC (V&S) has fileda verified notice of exemption under 49CFR part 1152 subpart F—ExemptAbandonments to abandon a line ofrailroad extending between milepost747.5 near Towner and milepost 869.4near NA Junction, a distance of 121.9miles in Pueblo, Crowley, and KiowaCounties, Colo. (the Towner Line). TheTowner Line traverses United StatesPostal Service Zip Codes 81022, 80125,81062, 81033, 81063, 81076, 81021,81045, 81036, and 81071
(1) The thing is in limbo. The abandonment filing is void.
(2) There are two offers for assistance out there...
(3) The rail pickup train is gone.
(4) A&K (V&S) is about to collide with STB. A&K tried a procedural end around the last time and it blew up in their face. Two separate sets of attorneys plus CDOT made a fundamental blunder that nobody, except the surveyors (PLSC) caught. PLSC also hammered them on the Federal Grant R/W issue that they tried to sweep under the rug.
(5) A&K owns the railroad, but they failed to notify STB or anyone else until recently (another A&K junkman's careless blunder)
(6) A&K is going to have to explain why it ignores state statute in two separate cases. They are already in the state's crosshairs for two other screw-ups that date back to the 1990's. Their biggest enemy is looking back at them in the mirror.
Chutton: Your entry above is missing something very key, very simple. Look at state map and see if you can find it. Hint: look at a USGS quad for Todd Point, Colorado.
Stay tuned.
Ok, so the STB filing is void - probably my search term string was lacking, but that was the latest info I could find with simple searching (lots of info from 2000 or so discussing how spiffy the new operators were going to be).As for the Todd Point, CO - USGS map - this is what I could find - not sure what the hint means.BTW, the turn of the century articles indicated the freight traffic expected was pretty much grain and quarry, with a rail museum eventually. What were/are the real revenue prospects for this line?
Looks to me like our college MC has found that Otero County is involved for a very short distance which 'probably' voids the abandonment application because of the inaccurate description.
chutton01 Ok, so the STB filing is void - probably my search term string was lacking, but that was the latest info I could find with simple searching (lots of info from 2000 or so discussing how spiffy the new operators were going to be).As for the Todd Point, CO - USGS map - this is what I could find - not sure what the hint means.BTW, the turn of the century articles indicated the freight traffic expected was pretty much grain and quarry, with a rail museum eventually. What were/are the real revenue prospects for this line?
(1) As for the map, lower right hand corner, it's there in bold black letters (it isn't in Hutton's cut & paste attachment above...DC got it.)...Looks kinda dumb when you don't even know whatcha bought?
(2) white winter wheat (the drought is finally over), relatively high grade (for filtering) limestone deposits, oil & gas (read fracking) carload bulk materials plus some E-W bridge traffic. Car storage has helped a little, but it kills operations (A&K already stripped the backtracks and sidings where they could get away with it - a couple of the Ag industries didn't catch on until it was too late. Typical less than above board or ethical A&K stealth tactic.)
Between Fower and Boone there is a junction - which line is that coming in from the southeast? It looks like there were 2 roadbeds west of there? Can anyone give a little history of those lines?
Thank you.
mudchicken chutton01 Ok, so the STB filing is void - probably my search term string was lacking, but that was the latest info I could find with simple searching (lots of info from 2000 or so discussing how spiffy the new operators were going to be).As for the Todd Point, CO - USGS map - this is what I could find - not sure what the hint means.BTW, the turn of the century articles indicated the freight traffic expected was pretty much grain and quarry, with a rail museum eventually. What were/are the real revenue prospects for this line? (1) As for the map, lower right hand corner, it's there in bold black letters (it isn't in Hutton's cut & paste attachment above...DC got it.)...Looks kinda dumb when you don't even know whatcha bought? (2) white winter wheat (the drought is finally over), relatively high grade (for filtering) limestone deposits, oil & gas (read fracking) carload bulk materials plus some E-W bridge traffic. Car storage has helped a little, but it kills operations (A&K already stripped the backtracks and sidings where they could get away with it - a couple of the Ag industries didn't catch on until it was too late. Typical less than above board or ethical A&K stealth tactic.)
Mr. Chicken, I know not who A&K is. Would you be so kind as to provide a brief history of the cast of characters and their nefarious deeds?
doghouseMr. Chicken, I know not who A&K is. Would you be so kind as to provide a brief history of the cast of characters and their nefarious deeds?
I doubt MC would be willing to post that here. If you do a search on "a&k railroad colorado problems" you'll find a few links that might give you an idea of what's going on. Hint: at least one link included the word "vultures."
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
tree68 doghouse Mr. Chicken, I know not who A&K is. Would you be so kind as to provide a brief history of the cast of characters and their nefarious deeds? I doubt MC would be willing to post that here. If you do a search on "a&k railroad colorado problems" you'll find a few links that might give you an idea of what's going on. Hint: at least one link included the word "vultures."
doghouse Mr. Chicken, I know not who A&K is. Would you be so kind as to provide a brief history of the cast of characters and their nefarious deeds?
May they be absolutely foiled in this instance.
Johnny
JOHN MEHRLING Between Fower and Boone there is a junction - which line is that coming in from the southeast? It looks like there were 2 roadbeds west of there? Can anyone give a little history of those lines? Thank you.
EDIT: For the record, ATSF built into Pueblo from the east in February 1876....MoPac built into Pueblo in December 1887 and was officially in operation on 1/1/1888....There was almost a third railroad in the 26 mile stretch between Pueblo and NA Junction in 1906 [Headed to Burlington on the Rock Island out on the KS border], the Colorado & NorthEastern RR, but American Sugar Refining (later American Crystal Sugar) backed off in its war with Holly Sugar over the sugar refining and supply capacities in SE Colorado. Union Pacific's Kansas Pacific/ "Arkansas Valley Ry" (which I assume DC is expert on, being from the SE CO area) was coming from the other direction (Kit Carson-Las Animas-La Junta-Timpas Creek/Swink) in 1875 until it fizzled out in 1877....Coulda been a congested place.
MC, Nepesta (NA) is what some old timers used, and I may have known some of them. Now I are one!!
Deggesty tree68 doghouse I doubt MC would be willing to post that here. If you do a search on "a&k railroad colorado problems" you'll find a few links that might give you an idea of what's going on. Hint: at least one link included the word "vultures." From what I have seen, these people are vultures; vultures (the bird kind) look for dead or almost dead animals and if the animal is not quite dead will attack it so as to hasten its death. May they be absolutely foiled in this instance.
tree68 doghouse I doubt MC would be willing to post that here. If you do a search on "a&k railroad colorado problems" you'll find a few links that might give you an idea of what's going on. Hint: at least one link included the word "vultures."
doghouse
From what I have seen, these people are vultures; vultures (the bird kind) look for dead or almost dead animals and if the animal is not quite dead will attack it so as to hasten its death.
My understanding is that A&K and their dealings gives vultures a good name in comparison.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Someplace in Trains way back when was a itttle story or photo caption like "Incident at Nepesta Curve" - might have been the FM publicity photo series, or a frontispiece-type photo and caption.
Bingo !
"Incident at Nepesta curve - a slow order not canceled"
- Paul Nortth.
I don't want to get into a debate about A&K (sometimes considered the "Darth Vader" of the short line industry). But I was pretty heavily involved in the Towner Line abandonment and ultimate line sale in the 1990's, so let me make a few observations.
The Towner line used to be part of a main line of the MP between Pueblo, Kansas City and points east. It was also the major eastern connection of the DRG&W (at Pueblo). Because of the importance of the Pueblo conection to DRG&W, the latter road got trackage rights over the Pueblo-KC line in the UP-MP merger. Once DRG&W and SP became part of the same family (following the abortive ATSF-SP merger), the "new" SP used the DRG&W trackage rights east of Pueblo (including rights over the Towner line) to cobble together a "central corridor" transcontinental route (including the Tennessee Pass line west of Pueblo) which had higher costs and poorer service than any of the competing transcontinental routes - not a winning combination.
UP proposed to abandon the Towner line as part of the UP-SP merger. The combined UP-SP system would obviously have superior routes to handle the transcontinental traffic SP had been handling over the line, and the on-line traffic was miniscule. The STB approved the abandonment as part of the UP-SP merger (Docket No. AB-3, Sub-No-130).
At this point the story gets interesting. The various communities served by the Towner line sought to preserve the line. From my perspective, their motivation seemed to have more to do with preserving real estate tax revenue than preserving rail service. Be that as it may, the state ended up purchasing the line from UP for Net Liquidation Value (the scrap/sale value of the line's assets less disposition costs), on the theory that, if the line proved to be non-viable (as it proved to be), the state could recover the value it had paid. I think it fair to say that neither the railroad nor the state expected that the deal would be successful in preserving rail service. That expectation proved to be accurate, as the road was never able to generate enough traffic to be viable. The state ultimately sold the road to recover its investment. Given this history, it is hardly surprising that the line ended up being proposed for abandonment - the wonder is that it lasted as long as it did. A railroad needs traffic to stay in business. Without the overhead traffic, there was precious little business to sustain this line From an economic standpoint, it should have been torn up in the late 1990's. And, but for Colorado state political considerations, it would have been.
Falcon48[snipped; emphasis added - PDN] . . . But I was pretty heavily involved in the Towner Line abandonment and ultimate line sale in the 1990's . . . The STB approved the abandonment as part of the UP-SP merger (Docket No. AB-3, Sub-No-130). . . . Be that as it may, the state ended up purchasing the line from UP for Net Liquidation Value (the scrap/sale value of the line's assets less disposition costs) . . . Given this history, it is hardly surprising that the line ended up being proposed for abandonment - the wonder is that it lasted as long as it did. . . .
The STB approved the abandonment as part of the UP-SP merger (Docket No. AB-3, Sub-No-130).
. . . Be that as it may, the state ended up purchasing the line from UP for Net Liquidation Value (the scrap/sale value of the line's assets less disposition costs) . . . Given this history, it is hardly surprising that the line ended up being proposed for abandonment - the wonder is that it lasted as long as it did. . . .
- Paul North.
Who operated the Tower line when Colorado owned it? Did Colorado put conditions on the sale of the line? Was A&K the only bidder?
And this was the route of the Colorado Eagle, which I rode in 1960 in a through sleeper from Wichita that ran on an MP mixed train to Herendon (?) where it was attached to the streamliner. Rode it to Colorado Springs, or rather to the Palmer Lake just north, since the porter failed to awailen me in time. Fortunate for me, the towerman was going off duty and drove me back to the Springs.
Dave, your connection was at Herrington, KS
I too have ridden the Colorado Eagle, but only between Pueblo and Denver several times.
Paul_D_North_Jr Falcon48 [snipped; emphasis added - PDN] . . . But I was pretty heavily involved in the Towner Line abandonment and ultimate line sale in the 1990's . . . The STB approved the abandonment as part of the UP-SP merger (Docket No. AB-3, Sub-No-130). . . . Be that as it may, the state ended up purchasing the line from UP for Net Liquidation Value (the scrap/sale value of the line's assets less disposition costs) . . . Given this history, it is hardly surprising that the line ended up being proposed for abandonment - the wonder is that it lasted as long as it did. . . . Two abandonments ? Not giving you a hard time here - far from it - but just wondering if that actually happened (pertains to the Adorirondack Railroad situation thread elsewhere on this Forum). - Paul North.
Falcon48 [snipped; emphasis added - PDN] . . . But I was pretty heavily involved in the Towner Line abandonment and ultimate line sale in the 1990's . . . The STB approved the abandonment as part of the UP-SP merger (Docket No. AB-3, Sub-No-130). . . . Be that as it may, the state ended up purchasing the line from UP for Net Liquidation Value (the scrap/sale value of the line's assets less disposition costs) . . . Given this history, it is hardly surprising that the line ended up being proposed for abandonment - the wonder is that it lasted as long as it did. . . .
Two abandonments ? Not giving you a hard time here - far from it - but just wondering if that actually happened (pertains to the Adorirondack Railroad situation thread elsewhere on this Forum).
Yes - two abandonments. The STB approved abandonment of the entire NA Jct-Towner line in 1996 in the UP-SP merger (Docket No. AB-3, Sub-No. 130). But UP never "consummated" it. Abandonment authority is "permissive" - a railroad doesn't have to exercise it. In this case, UP didn't exercise the 1996 authority - it sold the line to the state of Colorado instead, The state then arranged for an operator, and ultimately sold the line to recover its investment. Since the line was never actually abandoned , the current owner has to file for its own abandonment.
As an aside, the state was under no illusions about the viability of the line when it purchased it. State officials made very clear at the time that, if the line proved unsuccessful, the state would sell the line to get its money back. To no one's real surprise, the line proved to be a dismal failure. So the state got rid of it. It's always fun to villify A&K (they almost seem to relish their "Darth Vader" image). But, in this case at least, the ultimate abandonment of the line was a foregone conclusion long before A&K got into the picture.
Falcon48, thank you for that direct answer - esp. the "permissive" part. It mirrors exactly what I've understood the doctrine to be in these scenarios.
Next, let's engage in the theoretical exercise of: When was did the 1st abandonment lapse, the line come back into service, and thus necessitating the 2nd abandonment ?
Without knowing the details, it seems to me that the sale to Colorado could have been a mere "Net Liquidation Value" asset sale (unless the line remained in operation through that transaction). If it wasn't in operation then and was later scrapped, that would seem to be the consummation of the abandonment.
But when Colorado arranged for an operator and the line was restored to service, then that negated the first abandonment, and necessitated a second abandonment to legally cease that service.
The tricky issue would be presented if the line had remained in service continuously. At what point would the first abandonment have been negated ? A sale to Colorado could be viewed as a mere change in post-abandonment ownership - would that even require STB approval ? On the other hand, if it was a Net Liquidation Value sale, that's the last resort before abandonment, but it does allow the line to continue to operate. So was the first abandonment permission even necessary if a NLV sale was to take place ?
I view hiring an operator for sure is a step that restores the line to service and necessitates the second abandonment.
If you're so inclined, I welcome your response to these queries, even if it's only to tell me that I'm all wrong about it.
Thanks again,
Paul_D_North_Jr Falcon48, thank you for that direct answer - esp. the "permissive" part. It mirrors exactly what I've understood the doctrine to be in these scenarios. Next, let's engage in the theoretical exercise of: When was did the 1st abandonment lapse, the line come back into service, and thus necessitating the 2nd abandonment ? Without knowing the details, it seems to me that the sale to Colorado could have been a mere "Net Liquidation Value" asset sale (unless the line remained in operation through that transaction). If it wasn't in operation then and was later scrapped, that would seem to be the consummation of the abandonment. But when Colorado arranged for an operator and the line was restored to service, then that negated the first abandonment, and necessitated a second abandonment to legally cease that service. The tricky issue would be presented if the line had remained in service continuously. At what point would the first abandonment have been negated ? A sale to Colorado could be viewed as a mere change in post-abandonment ownership - would that even require STB approval ? On the other hand, if it was a Net Liquidation Value sale, that's the last resort before abandonment, but it does allow the line to continue to operate. So was the first abandonment permission even necessary if a NLV sale was to take place ? I view hiring an operator for sure is a step that restores the line to service and necessitates the second abandonment. If you're so inclined, I welcome your response to these queries, even if it's only to tell me that I'm all wrong about it. Thanks again, - Paul North.
The reason A&K can't rely on the 1996 abandonment authority is that it is not UP. MP or SP. Once the common carrier responsibility was transfered to a new entity, and that entity started operating, the new entity (or its successors) would have to get their own regulatory authority if they wanted to abandon the line or discontinue service over it.
You are correct that, if UP had actually exercised the abandonment, but then transferred the property to another entity that restored operations, that entity would have to get new abandonment authority if it wanted to shut down the line. However, to my knowledge, UP didn't exercise its abandonment authority prior to the sale to Colorado, so that's not the situation here. Still, the bottom line is the same - the new operator can't rely on UP's 1996 abandonment authority if it wants to shut down, and has to get its own.
With respect to the regulatory hoops the state had to jump through to acquire the line, time and creeping senility have dimmed my recollection of how this was structured. However, there is a procedure available for a state acquiring a rail line that it intends to have a contractor operate, in which the state doesn't assume a common carrier obligation. Presumably this is the procedure that was used. Separate regulatory authority (typically an exemption) would have to be obtained by the operator. I believe this was done for the original operator and, later, for the A&K operator, but I haven't researched this point.
To my knowledge the sale price paid by the state was net liquidation value (that's what state officials told everyone). You are correct that an abandonment would not have been necessary to make a sale like this - short line "spinoff" sales or leases from Class I roads are typically done without a prior abandonment. The reason that wasn't done here was timing. The state's interest in purchasing the Towner line did not develop until very late in the game, after the abandonment authority had been granted. Had the state been interested in an NLV sale earlier, the abandonment would have been unnecessary.
Thanks again for those explanations. An interesting discussion.
Falcon48 ... I believe this was done for the original operator and, later, for the A&K operator, but I haven't researched this point. ...
... I believe this was done for the original operator and, later, for the A&K operator, but I haven't researched this point.
...
Who was the original operator after Colorado acquired the line. Was it independant of A&K.
MidlandMike Falcon48 ... I believe this was done for the original operator and, later, for the A&K operator, but I haven't researched this point. ... Who was the original operator after Colorado acquired the line. Was it independant of A&K.
That said, the original operator was an outfit called the Colorado, Kansas & Pacific Ry. I'm pretty sure it had no affiliation with A&K. CK&P had previously made an completely unrealistic proposal to acquire both the Towner line, the Tennessee Pass line and intervening trackage which wasn't proposed for abandonment, but was rebuffed both by the state and by UP (in large part, because of lack of funding). If A&K had been behind CK&P, it would certainly have come out at the time, as it would have been relevant to CK&P's financial wherewithal (or lack thereof).
I did some quick research on the STB website. You'll find quite a bit of information on the post UP abandonment history of the Towner line in an STB decision served November 13, 2012 in Finance Docket 35664. It's available at the following web address:
http://www.stb.dot.gov/Decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/95302871ABB9CEFB85257AB500751DC4/$file/42646.pdf
Based on this decision, my recollection of what happened was essentially correct. The state acquired the line from UP in 1998. CK&P acquired the right to operate the line from the state. In 2004, the state sold the line to V&S (the A&K affiliate), which then took over operation of the line from CK&P. In other words, A&K didn't come into the picture until 2004.
It sounds like the serious shortline companies (like the one who tool over the ex-MP line in Kansas, east of Towner) took a pass on the Colorado segment. It reminds me of the ex-RI Colorado line. A large shortline company took over the line east of Limon, while the Limon-Colorado Springs segment was taken over by the hardluck C&LC. That segment is now an empty grade.
Interim operator of the Towner Line was Court Hammond's Colorado Kansas & Pacific. They defaulted on their purchase option, largely because of the drought that pretty much wiped out agriculture in SE Colorado and the thing went back to CDOT/Colorado ownership protected under a state statute. (Unfortunately, CDOT can't railroad, but they were the funding operation within the state beauracracy.)
PDN: The scenario is very much like the CRIP Peoria Heights case for the reason that interests you. (It also was bought out of abandonment.)
The parts missed on the Rock Island/Kyle scenario was the Mid-States Port Authority (MSPA) and The Colorado & Eastern (Gary Flanders/Northern Railcar) debacle with all of its financial shennanigans which sucked-in hard luck C&LC. The line was abandoned by a 4-County agency, not C&LC and has unwittingly become a court case waiting to happen if folks discover what that multi-county agency failed* to follow through on. There is a small piece of the Colorado Springs end owned by UP (DRGW purchase) west of Constitution Ave in the Springs that survives.
*It continues to amaze me how badly local agencies mis-read or choose to ignore federal abandonment statutes (and guess their way through a mess) and then blunder themselves into a crisis.
How much traffic did the SP-D&RGW-MP route actually get during the D&RGW ownership of SP? Did not SP have a long-standing obligation to solicit traffic for the Ogden gateway and the UP? What about the costs of operating over Tennessee Pass?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.